190
edits
Abiding by Civilian Law: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
##Others explain that the land belongs to the king.<ref>Ran Nedarim 28a s.v. "Bamoches" says because the land belongs to the king, he can make the laws, and if you don't abide he can kick you out of his land. Shitah Mekubetzes Nedarim 28a explains that this is just like all property owners who can insist on standards on their property. Chatom Sofer 1:44 writes that the Ran is only referring to taxes that are against the will of the people, but laws related to custom and manners even the Ran agrees that these are binding because the people agree to the king's dominion. [http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/shana/ariel2-1.htm Rav Yakov Arieli] extends the Chatom Sofer to any taxes that is for the benefit of the people such as money spent on highways and bridges.</ref> | ##Others explain that the land belongs to the king.<ref>Ran Nedarim 28a s.v. "Bamoches" says because the land belongs to the king, he can make the laws, and if you don't abide he can kick you out of his land. Shitah Mekubetzes Nedarim 28a explains that this is just like all property owners who can insist on standards on their property. Chatom Sofer 1:44 writes that the Ran is only referring to taxes that are against the will of the people, but laws related to custom and manners even the Ran agrees that these are binding because the people agree to the king's dominion. [http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/shana/ariel2-1.htm Rav Yakov Arieli] extends the Chatom Sofer to any taxes that is for the benefit of the people such as money spent on highways and bridges.</ref> | ||
##Others explain that the king has dominion over all property in the country.<ref>Rabbenu Yona (Aliyot of Rabbenu Yona Baba Batra 54b s.v. "Umi Amar") says this works like hefker beit din hefker, that the king has dominion over all property. Mabit (Kiryat Sefer Gezela 5), Meiri (Nedarim 28a) and the Vilna Gaon (Choshen Mishpat 369, 34) say that this is derived from the laws of a king derived from Sefer Shmuel Alef Perek 8.</ref> | ##Others explain that the king has dominion over all property in the country.<ref>Rabbenu Yona (Aliyot of Rabbenu Yona Baba Batra 54b s.v. "Umi Amar") says this works like hefker beit din hefker, that the king has dominion over all property. Mabit (Kiryat Sefer Gezela 5), Meiri (Nedarim 28a) and the Vilna Gaon (Choshen Mishpat 369, 34) say that this is derived from the laws of a king derived from Sefer Shmuel Alef Perek 8.</ref> | ||
#Dina d'malchusa dina applies to all appointed officials who are keeping to the local laws, not just the king.<ref>Shut Rashba 1:637</ref> | |||
#Dina d'malchuta dina applies to democracies such as the United States.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 34. see note 71 where he quotes from Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin (Writings of Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin 96:8), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Maadanei Eretz 20:8), Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe CM 2:62), Shevet Halevi 2:58. This makes sense with the Rashbam and Rambam that dina d'malchusa is a social contract. One could argue that according to the Ran that the reason for dina d'malchusa is that the king owns the land, this shouldn't apply to a democracy. However, Pe’as Sadecha (165) writes that even according to the Ran, dina d’malchusa dina applies because in a democracy the country belongs to the people, and their elected representatives have the same power as a king to legislate. </ref> | #Dina d'malchuta dina applies to democracies such as the United States.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 34. see note 71 where he quotes from Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin (Writings of Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin 96:8), Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Maadanei Eretz 20:8), Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe CM 2:62), Shevet Halevi 2:58. This makes sense with the Rashbam and Rambam that dina d'malchusa is a social contract. One could argue that according to the Ran that the reason for dina d'malchusa is that the king owns the land, this shouldn't apply to a democracy. However, Pe’as Sadecha (165) writes that even according to the Ran, dina d’malchusa dina applies because in a democracy the country belongs to the people, and their elected representatives have the same power as a king to legislate. </ref> | ||
#There is a discussion as to which laws one is obligated to follow the dina d'malchusa: | #There is a discussion as to which laws one is obligated to follow the dina d'malchusa: | ||
